Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why Not Accelerate Wheels On Landing?  
User currently offlineTaromA380 From Romania, joined Sep 2005, 334 posts, RR: 0
Posted (8 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 4106 times:

Hello everybody,

When big airliners are landing, the gear wheels are immobile, thus the tires will get significant stress when touching the runway at ~150 knots, with such a mass pressure upon them. Everyone knows the dark rubber smoke which appears on each landing. The result is that the tires will need to be replaced after a few (or more) dozen landings.

Now, I ask you : why not putting a small electrical motor on the gear, to accelerate the wheels near the landing speed just before touching down, avoiding the abrasive contact shock thereby the degradation of the tires ?

I think it would be economically wise on long term. Just think about how many times an airliner needs to change the tires because of repeated landing shocks that reduce their size until the security limit. Moreover, tires would be much economical to acquire, not needing to be specially reinforced to support dozens highly abrasive landings.

I bet you'll come with the "weight" motive, but I think those electrical motors doesn't need to be big, the accelerating of the wheels would be in the air, without friction, so no need to huge power. How heavy two main devices plus one smaller device for the nose wheel would be ? 100 kg overall ? What is 100 kg besides the 560.000 kg of the A380 ? Not even talking about the tires weight save.

And remember, a big airliner like the A380 needs not less than 22 tires replacement !!

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Tony Woof
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Luis Tena Orozco



8 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineFredT From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2002, 2185 posts, RR: 26
Reply 1, posted (8 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 4096 times:

This has been discussed numerous times and thoroughly beaten to death. Try searching the forum.


I thought I was doing good trying to avoid those airport hotels... and look at me now.
User currently offlineTedTAce From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (8 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 4088 times:

I think it comes down to weight/complexity/cost issue. I'm POSITIVE that tire wear, when compared to additional fuel burn and complexity/cost of such a system, makes burning rubber a more appealing option.

User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31679 posts, RR: 56
Reply 3, posted (8 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 4088 times:

http://www.airliners.net/discussions/tech_ops/read.main/41233/4/
regds
MEL



Think of the brighter side!
User currently offlineSlamClick From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 10062 posts, RR: 68
Reply 4, posted (8 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 3995 times:

To reduce unsprung weight for cornering.

Oh, wait, that was the answer in a car forum.



Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
User currently offlineZSOFN From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 1413 posts, RR: 6
Reply 5, posted (8 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 3966 times:

The main reason is actually due to the large gyroscopic effect the spinning tyres would have, making the aircraft very difficult to manouvre on final approach. I found this out from an SAA technician in JNB.

User currently offlineFredT From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2002, 2185 posts, RR: 26
Reply 6, posted (8 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 3955 times:

Yes, especially significant compared to the low mass and low RPM of other rotating objects on the aircraft... such as the engine fans. Hangar tale, that one. The aircraft aren't hard to manouever after taking off, are they? Even before the gear is retracted/the wheels braked.

Most tire wear is during taxi anyway. There's just not much wear to be saved. Read the previous thread, you are reiterating things which were said there.



I thought I was doing good trying to avoid those airport hotels... and look at me now.
User currently offlineZSOFN From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 1413 posts, RR: 6
Reply 7, posted (8 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 3901 times:

Quoting FredT (Reply 6):
Yes, especially significant compared to the low mass and low RPM of other rotating objects on the aircraft... such as the engine fans

You might be right, but surely the orientation of the wheels is important, being side-on to direction of travel. I'll stand corrected if this is not the case though!


User currently offlineGRZ-AIR From Austria, joined Apr 2001, 574 posts, RR: 4
Reply 8, posted (8 years 11 months 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 3678 times:

Tire wear is good for economy... there are many ways how tires could be improved to withstand more ldgs and t/o's..but then fewer would be needed which is of no interest to the tire manufacturers.

The best solution I came accross once was a tire which had a little "hump" going around the outside of the tire...thus building up friction agains the air which resulted in accelerating the tire up to landing speed...tests showed that the lifetime of these tires were much higher than the ones used today..

The idea was however (for obvious above stated reasons) turned down by the large aircraft tire corporations..

Good idea though! And far better than any "electrical" motor and other crap..

cheers GRZ



When I joined A.net it was still free, haha ;).
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Why Not Accelerate Wheels On Landing?
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Why Not Visuals Recorded On CVR posted Wed Jul 9 2003 13:01:08 by HAWK21M
Why Not More (quick) Stops On Longer Flights? posted Sun Jul 16 2006 15:38:25 by Pavlin
Lettering On Wings: Why Not Done Anymore? posted Fri Jul 14 2006 03:52:03 by Airwave
Why The "wheel" On Landing Gear Levers? posted Fri Mar 3 2006 11:52:41 by Slinker
Why Not Parachutes To Break During Landing? posted Sun Sep 11 2005 23:34:26 by TaromA380
Why Not Winglets On Every Airplane? posted Thu Jun 2 2005 18:24:04 by KCMike
Why Not Engines On Top Of The Wings? posted Wed Jun 1 2005 00:21:25 by Keta
Why Not Use Goo Tyres On Aircraft posted Tue Feb 1 2005 10:59:27 by Allpress
Winglets On DC10: Why Not? posted Mon Jan 24 2005 07:53:12 by Bruce
Why Not Round Engines Intake On 737 NG's? posted Fri Mar 7 2003 05:25:19 by Jgore

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format